OCEANIC TRADE MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI V. CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

ITA 4255/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Oceanic Trade Minerals Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, challenging an order from the learned Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Gurugram, which was passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant contested the ex-parte order and the denial of concessional tax rates under section 115BAA, despite having filed Form 10-IC. The Tribunal found that the appellant was not given a reasonable opportunity to be heard, leading to the decision to set aside the previous order and remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470890 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 01-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 22-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KRISHNA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: MANI JAIN
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 4255/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year : 2021–22) Oceanic Trade Minerals Pvt. Ltd. 1207, Remi Commercio Off Veera Desai Road, Shah Industry Estate, Andheri, Mumbai - 400058 PAN: AACCO9091J ……………. Appellant v/s DCIT, Circle-2(3)(1), Mumbai, ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri Mani Jain Revenue by : Shri Krishnakumar (Sr.DR) Date of Hearing – 01/10/2024 Date of Order 16/10/2024 O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 20/06/2024passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Gurugram [“learned Addl./Joint CIT(A)”], for the Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. In the interest of justice, the slight delay of 3 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. ITA No.4255/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2021-22) 2 3. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - “1. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without giving reasonable opportunity of being heard. 2. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of ld.AO in denying the claim of concessional tax u/s 115BAA, ignoring the fact that the appellant has duly filed Form 10-IC. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Id.AO in calculating the tax liability @30% instead of tax rate @22% as specified u/s 115BAA of the Act which has been duly claimed in the return of income, without affording any opportunity to the appellant in the intimation provided u/s 143(1)(a). 4. The Appellant craves leaves to alter, amend, withdraw or substitute any ground or grounds or to add any new ground or grounds of appeal on or before the hearing.” 4. During the hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (“learned AR”), at the outset, submitted that the learned Addl./Joint CIT(A) vide impugned order dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The learned AR submitted that on 02/04/2024 the learned CIT(A) issued a notice directing the assessee to file written submissions, which was responded to by the assessee and time was sought as certain details and clarification were yet to be received and compiled. It was submitted that thereafter the Addl./Joint CIT(A) issued three notices within a short span of less than two months, and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in the absence of any response from the assessee. 5. Having considered the submissions and perused the material available on record, it is evident that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order exparte. Now in appeal before us, the assessee is duly represented by the learned AR and wishes to pursue the litigation against the addition made by ITA No.4255/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2021-22) 3 the AO. During the hearing, the learned AR submitted that the learned Addl./Joint CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee exparte without granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice, the assessee be granted one more opportunity to represent its case on merits before the learned CIT(A). Consequently, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of the appeal on merits after consideration of all the details/submissions as may be filed by the assessee. No order shall be passed without affording the reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing to the parties. The assessee is directed to appear before the learned CIT(A) on all the dates of hearing as may be fixed without any default. As the matter is being restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, the other grievances raised by the assessee in the present appeal do not call for adjudication at this stage. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 16/10/2024 Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 16/10/2024 Prabhat ITA No.4255/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2021-22) 4 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5) Guard file. By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai "